Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: ganges Date: Apr 12, 2007 11:50am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: why 1977???

Quote:
“Substance. I would love to hear more about what makes 1977 such a hot year (I like it, though I do not equate it with, say 1969--and I can understand why many prefer 1977's subtle beauty over the hammering sound of 1969). “

This said by GOP made me think why I love 77, and “subtle beauty” said it for me very well. I’m writing in my second language here and find it hard to express at times, what I really want to say, so thank you for doing it for me. I feel that they had come to a point, where things just flowed easily and harmoniously, musically, and this is not saying it is the best year – it is just the one (also 76 has really really great shows – and many other years) which resonates with me the most, touches me on the deepest level and expresses the magic of the GD the best for me, but as I said, many other years are great, and I don’t have to choose only one year, too, which is nice. And of course I understand that people who saw their shows in the 80s, might say the same for that time.

I really enjoyed reading those stories the last days of some of you talking about your early years, and having grown up in the 60s as well, I started to remember and think about what happened to me, in context with the Dead. And something was very interesting – in 77 I didn’t listen to many of the bands I used to love in the late 60s and early 70s, and the GD had even gotten better for me (72 -77 is my peak time for them), even though I know there are quite some great shows in the 80s, just look at the DVDs from 89 (Buffalo and Downhill).

I started out 12 years old, in the garden of a friend of mine we were, and his sister was listening to the radio, when I heard my first beat/rock song – “I want to hold your hand”, that hit me really strong and from then on things changed. My first singles were “Rock and Roll music” and “The last time”, first albums a little later “Help” and a german Stones compilation from the 65 tour here. Beach Boys, Byrds, all the british groups like Kinks, Small Faces, Who and the great Lovin’ Spoonful from the east coast! Some time later things changed again, when I heard “Arnold Layne” and “See Emily Play” (Pink Floyd), the change from Beat to Underground, “Hey Joe” and “I feel free”, Clapton, Beck and Page, and I started to go to shows. First one was John Mayall, whom I never liked much, but it was the first one available, and even backstage. Then second Peter Green and the old Fleetwood Mac, and later all those festivals and bands of those days (PF, Led Z., TYA, Traffic, Genesis, Yes…). We didn’t get that many US bands over here in the beginning (but I saw Jimi, and some more like Canned Heat, Santana, Zappa, J. Winter) and so I was thrilled in 72 (Europe 72!), but I just caught 2 shows of many by the GD. But ever since I discovered the West Coast, especially the northern part (S.F.), I was hooked on that music (and I love the country, too). I think the first S.F. albums were “Cheap Thrills” and “Crown of Creation”, I loved QMS and Happy Trails – and then I found “Vintage Dead”, live album long out of print and never released on CD from Avalon ’66, the first Rider for me, and from then on they were “the best band ever”. Plus they represented the Hippies for me at the best ( what are hippies? might be a topic to discuss), for me it was the determination to do and be something new and different, in a good, positive and constructive way, to expand. "...think about moving the whole human race ahead a step -- or a few steps..." J.G.

Timeless music is something I would call their music, too, including so many genres. Well, I got sidetracked here a little, I wanted to say that the Dead really survived for me much longer than all the other bands. Some just were gone (Jimi, Janis, Jim M., Gram P.), others (at least for me) had their peak in the late 60s and early 70s and never got back to that (I think of Pink Floyd, their first albums, 3 or 4, were just great, I didn’t care much for them after that), and there were many others at that time like that.

So the GD were very unusual, 30 years, and especially Jerry, thinking of JGB shows even in the 90s, even 95, he got so deep, so much soul and “SUBLTE BEAUTY”, to come back to the beginning, very touching.

I don’t know if this makes much sense, I just wanted to contribute some after being quiet for a while, when I saw some of you really trying to make things interesting. So this is what came to mind…


Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Apr 12, 2007 12:47pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: why 1977???

Just wonderful, Ganges. If this is you finding it hard to express yourself in your second language you must be a joy to read in your mother tongue. Thanks for namechecking a signpost or two that mean something along my own musical journey ( I agree totally that early Floyd was the best Floyd). And thank you for bringing back a little sanity back to our little corner of the universe.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Apr 12, 2007 1:47pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: why 1977??? Ganges & Rob...

It bears repeating: love Syd, as you know, and have Piper loaded up for my trips to the gym. Those first two albums just really get me.

Also, Ganges, I so agree with your take on early ablums of various artists, especially those of the late 60s, being their best. Rob and I had a lengthy exchange about how good 67 & 70 were for such releases...amazing stuff that has withstood the test of time.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ganges Date: Apr 12, 2007 1:54pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: why 1977??? Ganges & Rob...

What happened between 65 and 70??? Is it only special because WE grew up at that time - but my 19 year old daughter is listening to 60s oldies all the time (I never gave her any), yesterday in the car she put on "A whiter shade of pale", "Light my fire", and "From the underworld" (did you hear that in the US - The Herd ( P. Frampton's 1st band)? I hadn't heard it in ages...

A friend of mine gives talks on the 60s (art and music), so much started then, and it must have been a time, when people (we) just felt more and more inspired to create something new, and were open and received inspiration for that.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: high flow Date: Apr 12, 2007 2:32pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: why 1977??? Ganges & Rob...

Hi Ganges! Nice to see your post.

It was a prolific era. I feel that because the music industry was not the 'machine' it is today, artist were exactly that, artists. Today the performers are hand-picked and less likely to emerge w/ well crafted and/or original material.

Back then, record companies did not know how to market rock n' roll and were not even certain it was worth the effort. But the artists were committed and continued to produce great music and poetry, not for mass consumption but for self expression. That is what is missing these days.

There are still a few forunate performers(Los Lobos and Horsby come to mind), who can produce an album which challenges the listener by being different than past material. Conversely, record companies would shit bricks if Christina Aguilera did a Jazz album.

Money and greed have damaged this form of art...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cush11 Date: Apr 12, 2007 11:55pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: why 1977???

Thank you ganges... I don't think there is anything I can add that my more eloquent friends above have already said... I was lucky enough to be there too... Grew up in the LA suburbs, was little young in the 60's (turned 18 in 1970, I must seem like a dinosaur to Max Chorak!), but did still manage to catch just about everyone at least once... Was a good, make that GREAT time to be alive!

And thanks to my friend AshesRising for drawing my eye to this fine thread...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ganges Date: Apr 13, 2007 1:40am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: why 1977???

thank you, friends, for the feedback!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Jerrob Hungar Date: Apr 13, 2007 7:03pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: why 1977???

Hiya Ganges. Sehr glücklich to see you back in the forum...
inspired maybe, by your journey to the east?...Liked the pic of the Ganges the other day. Your post struck a nerve with me because for a long time I thought I was stuck in the sixties..still trying to hang on to the same values and principles, that I'd learned in the sixties and seventies..still avidly listening to 60s and 70s music...still dreaming of 'the whole human race moving ahead a step'...pathetic? maybe, but it was a golden era for artistic creativity as high flow said not just in music but in literature and art too, a time of promise, of high ideals...lysergically enhanced of course...
Ashes' view of 77 is probably closest to the truth and correct me if I'm wrong but I think the main influence on the Dead's music in 77 was persian which maybe explains the harmonious subtle beauty...but I prefer not to categorise any of their music...in case I subconsciously create a bias against a particular year for instance and miss finding a hidden gem...
Speaking of categories you didn't mention any british folk artists of the 60/70s era, so here are some I can recommend - Fairport Convention, Pentangle, Incredible String Band, Bert Jansch and John Renbourn to name but a few...There's a song by the Incredible String Band called the Hedgehog Song, the chorus of which I find myself singing from time to time...
'Sitting one day by myself,
And I'm thinking, "What could be wrong?"
When this funny little Hedgehog comes running up to me,
And it starts up to sing me this song.

Oh, you know all the words, and you sung all the notes,
But you never quite learned the song, she sang.
I can tell by the sadness in your eyes,
That you never quite learned the song.'

but I keep on trying...
Bis zum nächsten Mal, mein freund

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cush11 Date: Apr 13, 2007 1:54am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: why 1977???

Thank you for the memories!

Good morning to you... Goodnight for me... Have a Grateful Day!!!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AshesRising Date: Apr 12, 2007 11:10pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: why 1977???

ganges: Great post. I was thinking about '77 yesterday as I was listening to the Jerry band from "Theatre 1839."

As for the GD, '77 seemed to be a synthesis of the energy from the late '60's combined with the finesse from '72 - '74 without sacrificing any creativity and spontaneity that was priceless. I wonder how much of the "subtle" (and not-so-subtle) "beauty" of 1977 was a result of their age: Jerry-35; Phil-37; Weir-30. Old enough to have plenty of experience yet still young enough to have seemingly boundless energy.

The Jerry Band's cd's from '76 - '78 are phenomenal. Keith appears to be more "at home" in that setting and seems to produce some of his finest material.

Good to see you here --- AshesRising

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SDH2O Date: Apr 12, 2007 12:23pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: why 1977???

Wow, haven't seen your name around these parts in some time, glad to see you're still among us. Always valued your input before.
As for the post, it makes perfect sense to me and I really like the whole "What is a Hippie?" train of thought. Just like the "What is a Head?" conversations we've had many, many times here and elsewhere. In my opinion it is very hard to define, as it seems to me to be more of a state of mind than anything else. The thought you included from Jerry seems as good an attempt as any I've come across to sum up the basic tenents that many say lie at the core of any Hippy. I think we all have a litle Hippie in us (I know, this could lead to several bad jokes such as: this 3 foot tall guy at Dead show approached a very fine looking young lady and said "Hey, do you have a little Hippie in you, and, if not, would you like one?") and for many of us it only took that one Jerry Moment to help bring it out. Listening to the Dead now helps keep that Hippie alive.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: n2oheaddives Date: Apr 12, 2007 12:27pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: why 1977???

ganges,
'78 was a good year, but how knows what everybody ate in Egypt. This Chicago show is another from this spring run.

http://www.archive.org/details/gd78-05-17.akg.weiner.8334.sbeok.shnf



Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Apr 12, 2007 12:38pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: why 1977???

Very cool...I thought you said it might be hard to understand?

Communication about something you love is always easier than you think. Good job.

And thanks for making the forum a better place, one post at a time.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: buscameby Date: Apr 12, 2007 12:32pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: why 1977???

Speaking for one who got on the Bus in 77' I remember vividly the energy that surrounded the band when I first saw them.
Maybe it was the cosmos or maybe it was the roses.
I remember walking home after my 1st show with about a dozen friends from my dorm down a busy Denver street and asking if anyone else thought the violin players were so beautiful during the Terrapin. Most of them looked at me with shit eating grins like I was nuts but a few just kinda winked like we shared something special.

I feel like there was something extra special in those days but it could have just been me but I here how great the shows were from alot of people and not just ones who were abable to attend them.

Maybe it was the feeling the band was regaining after the 2 year layoff. You would have to ask them but I know there was a really fine essence around the band and the crowd in those days, we were still a relatively small but Deadicated community who were there to create a shared experience.

and so I toast to the year of 1977'